Once Upon a Time… A Citizenry forgot who they were…

Once upon a time (and it’s starting to feel like a very long time ago) there was a country and a people that believed all of its citizens should be permitted to speak their mind and express their point of view without fear of their government punishing them or their fellow citizens interfering in their lives. Indeed, this idea was so important to the citizens that they enshrined it in a law known as the First Amendment and raised that law as sacred above all others.

Then, one day a man was shot and killed. This was no ordinary man; instead, he was a man who spoke loudly, passionately, and with great vehemence. His words were heard and loved by many. But for every person that loved his words, there was an equal number that profoundly disagreed with him and found his opinions to be harmful to people who held little power and believed that his words were contributing to the degradation of the democracy that all the citizens had once claimed to love. Nonetheless, nearly all citizens, regardless of their agreement or disagreement with this man, supported and protected his right to do so speak his opinions, as that right was enshrined in that sacred law known as the First Amendment.

When this man tragically died, almost every citizen agreed that his murder was utterly without justification and that his murder was a great crime. Unfortunately, many found condemnation of his death to be insufficient. Those who agreed with the man’s opinions, including the government charged with protecting the sacred law, turned his death into a weapon to wield against those who disagreed with that fallen man.  They decided that everyone must pretend that they agreed with this man’s words and if you were to speak regarding his death those words could only be in agreement with the fallen man’s own words. Indeed, they proclaimed that if a citizen spoke their mind and expressed a viewpoint (just as the fallen man had spent his life doing) in disagreement with the fallen man, then you would be punished… and so it was that the sacred law was soon forgotten by the very government that had been trusted with its protection…

Last Thursday, September 11, 2025, I sat at my desk and opened my computer to start my day’s work. I was greeted by an email from Tom Jones, and “She’s a Lady” immediately began playing in my head (and remained stuck there for the morning). Unfortunately, the email was not from that elder statesman of pop music, but instead from the founder of something called the American Accountability Foundation…

(I have chosen to redact the names here, because that part is not entirely my story to tell and I do not want to further complicate this lawyer’s life. We’ll call the lawyer Mr. Biglaw and his law firm Big & Law, LLP. See footnote for the typed text of the email and social media post)

To be clear, I do not know Tom Jones. I have no relationship with him or his organization. Indeed, unless you are referring to the crooner that sang “It’s Not Unusual,” I have never even heard of Tom Jones and his organization.

That said, the decision to send this email about Mr. Biglaw to me was neither random nor coincidental. I know Mr. Biglaw professionally. This summer I defended a client in a small employment law case he and Big & Law, LLP brought against a client of mine.  The case was filed in Federal Court in the Northern District of Illinois (NDIL), and within a few months was settled. That is my connection to Mr. Biglaw. That is my only connection to Mr. Biglaw. Thus, for Tom Jones and his American Accountability Foundation to connect Mr. Biglaw to me, they had to search for cases filed in the NDIL, pull those files, and identify the names of other lawyers and people involved. Other than a few filings with the NDIL, there is no other connection, public or private, between me and Mr. Biglaw. This means that, while it was not random that I received this email, it was the resulted of dedicated research that my name was found.  Moreover, I knew immeidatley that I was but one of probably tens or hundreds of other people that received that email as well.

As the days passed, I heard more and more stories of people losing their jobs for things they said about Charlie Kirk in the wake of his murder. Yesterday I decided to look into Mr. Biglaw to see if anything further had happened. The first article that popped up was from the ABA (American Bar Association) that reported that Mr. Biglaw had been fired from Big & Law, LLP for this social media post.

I was dumbfounded. I can certainly understand why many people would disagree with Mr. Biglaw’s take on Charlie Kirk. Yet, that post expressed nothing more than an opinion and point of view on Kirk’s unquestionably controversial legacy. Mr. Biglaw did not celebrate Kirk’s death, he did not encourage or incite violence, he did not even make light of the tragedy. What Mr. Biglaw did was criticize Kirk’s opinions, criticize the Supreme Court, Republicans, and the President. His crime? He failed to deify a man whose legacy was indisputably controversial. Last I checked, this was not a country where people lost their jobs for their political beliefs. This was not a country that required its citizens to blindly bend the knee to a man who was a hero to only some. Charlie Kirk should not have died, but neither should those of us who have opposing opinions be required to sacrifice our opinions on the altar of his legacy.

Look, I’ll be honest. I was and am a little shook. If this could happen to Mr. Biglaw, why not me? Why not you? As far as I know, Mr. Biglaw is not a particularly well-known or influential lawyer. He was (and hopefully will be again soon) a partner in a litigation group at a well-established law firm. In short, he is not that different from me or thousands of other lawyers. Mr. Biglaw, like so many others, is probably just an ordinary citizen expressing his constitutionally protected rights.

Perhaps the important distinction between Mr. Biglaw and me is not anything about Mr. Biglaw at all, but instead Big & Law, LLP. This is a firm that has been under attack by the Trump administration since day one and, to be fair, it’s been a withering assault. Big & Law, LLP has caved under the pressure like so many of our institutions, because the almighty dollar is holier than the Constitution. But herein lies the problem — being a lawyer is not like other jobs. One does not automatically become eligible to practice law after graduating law school and passing the bar. Rather, in order to become licensed to practice, an attorney must swear an oath. Not just an oath to do a good job and try their best, but an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of their respective state. There are only a few jobs where that is required — military, police, and elected officials, for example. This line of work is fundamentally different than most others. When the partners at Big & Law, LLP made the decision to fire Mr. Biglaw for the exercise of his speech (speech that did not at all relate to his function as an attorney), they violated their oaths. The decision was flat wrong on many levels, but because it is attorneys punishing an attorney, it is a violation of their oath. They broke their promise and should be ashamed for their spineless timidity. Perhaps they believe an oath is just words and “words are wind…”, but to me, it has always been the North Star of my practice.

The discerning reader might read this story and point out that the First Amendment is not at issue here because this is a private individual (Tom Jones) attacking another private person (Mr. Biglaw) and a private company (Big & Law, LLP) making a private business decision to terminate an at-will employee (Mr. Biglaw). There is no direct government involvement, and the First Amendment protects a citizen’s right to free speech by constraining governmental action. And that is a fair point. I’d argue that the oath moves it out of ordinary private conduct. Moreover, Big & Law, LLP likely acted out of fear of governmental interference. More importantly though, the First Amendment has come to mean something much greater than a simple constraint on government action. Instead, the First Amendment represents our shared and collective belief in the value and necessity of the free exchange of ideas throughout our society. Other than elections, free speech is the single most indispensable and irreplaceable bulwark against tyranny. Indeed, we could not even have free and fair elections without first having the indisputable right to free speech.

Let’s be clear-eyed about this though: Charlie Kirk’s assassination has already been weaponized to suppress speech. We have heard Donald Trump, Pam Bondi, J.D. Vance, and Stephen Miller (just to name a few) speak openly about their plans to use this tragedy to bludgeon the left and suppress speech. Need proof? Ask Jimmy Kimmel. His show was suspended because he made a joke — not about Charlie Kirk’s death, but about Trump’s response to his death. The Chair of the FCC then put direct pressure on ABC to take action against Kimmel. And ABC, like Big & Law, LLP and so many others before them, capitulated.

This is not a right or left issue. This should not be a concern for only liberals or Democrats. This should and must be a concern for everyone who believes in the First Amendment, believes in the Constitution, believes in representative democracy… believes that we are better than this.

I am afraid writing this. I will be afraid when I hit the publish button. Indeed, when I realized I had been tangentially drawn into the smear campaign against Mr. Biglaw, I felt compelled to inform my partners and let them know about my personal writings because we are now being stalked by thought police. I have had conversations with my wife about whether continuing to write like this is wise. I imagine there are thousands of other people having similar conversations. Luckily, no one reads this blog anyway. I am not influential or powerful. I am not well known. I am an ordinary citizen. If we can stop this degradation of our Constitution and turn the ship around, it will be because a critical mass of ordinary citizens decline to make decisions based on fear (decline to comply in advance). If we can save this republic (because that is truly what we are talking about), it will require ordinary voices choosing to speak.

I am calling for a return to the center (I’ll explain this more in a separate piece). For now, let’s remember that we can and should disagree — and that our democracy depends upon maintaining that right of disagreement. Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, Baptist or atheist, LGBTQ or born-again Christian, from a blue state or red state, the city or the country, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican — as an American you should believe that the other side has a right to their beliefs and a right to express them. At the center, we can find ourselves again.

fn: John - You may have had occasion to work with Mr. Biglaw at Big & Law, LLP - or maybe with the firm and his colleagues. I wanted to send a quick note to make sure you know that Mr. Biglaw is a despicable human being. While most Americans were mourning the assisnation [sic] of a father, husband, and friend, Mr. Biglaw thought it was a great time to lean into attacking Charlie Kirk and the people who loved him.

Mr. Biglaw Facebook Post: Charlie Kirk got famous as one of America’s leading spreaders of hatred, misinformation, and intolerance. The current political moment - - where an extremist Supreme Court and feckless Republican Congress are enabling a Republican President to become a tyrant and building him modern-day Gestapo for assaulting black and brown folks — is a result of Charlie KIrk’s “contributions” to American media and politics. That said, no one i this country shoudl be mrudered for their political speech. WIshing comfort to his wife and children in this difficult time. Maybe this will be the event that gets MAGA to be serious about gun control. Dead school children haven’t been enough.

If you want to know what’s ruining America, it’s Mr. Biglaw and firms like Big & Law, LLP that hire him.
Thanks,
Tom